In re Brandiwell K.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Brandiwell K.

247 A.D.2d 931, 668 N.Y.S.2d 790, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1314

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedFebruary 4, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 247 A.D.2d 931 (In re Brandiwell K.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Brandiwell K., 247 A.D.2d 931, 668 N.Y.S.2d 790, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1314 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Family Court’s determination that the four children of respondent are neglected is supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see, Family Ct Act § 1046 [b] [i]). The record establishes that respondent’s eldest child was beaten by respondent’s boyfriend and that respondent failed to intercede to protect the child from that physical abuse. That failure demonstrates a fundamental defect in respondent’s understanding of the duties of parenthood (see, Matter of Rasheda S., 183 AD2d 770; Matter of Lynelle W., 177 AD2d 1008) and thus supports the determination of derivative neglect with respect to the other three children. (Appeal from Order of Erie County Family Court, Townsend, J. — Neglect.)

Present — Pine, J. P., Lawton, Hayes, Wisner and Boehm, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Family Court’s determination that the four children of respondent are neglected is supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see, Family Ct Act § 1046 [b] [i]). The record establishes that respondent’s eldest child was beaten by respondent’s boyfriend and that respondent failed to intercede to protect the child from that physical abuse. That failure demonstrates a fundamental defect in respondent’s understanding of the duties of parenthood (see, Matter of Rasheda S., 183 AD2d 770; Matter of Lynelle W., 177 AD2d 1008) and thus supports the determination of derivative neglect with respect to the other three children. (Appeal from Order of Erie County Family Court, Townsend, J. — Neglect.)

Present — Pine, J. P., Lawton, Hayes, Wisner and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

247 A.D.2d 931, 668 N.Y.S.2d 790, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1314, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-brandiwell-k-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack